Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Self starting universe.

Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2015 11:26:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

It's a specific case of a quadratic function where a few of the terms cancel, are zero, or are negligible.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

Be careful about using a variable twice to mean two different things. Might want to use x,y,z in place of a,b,c if you're using c for the speed of light.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.

Well, if it didn't precisely mean something, then there would have been no point in including it. If it is only meant to illustrate the point you say it illustrates, then you could just state that point, or you could explain how you can infer that from the equation (actually, I'm not convinced your description of its meaning is accurate). If it's meant to illustrate a point, you would need to provide more information. Anyway, looks interesting. So where did you get it?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2015 11:35:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/4/2015 11:26:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

It's a specific case of a quadratic function where a few of the terms cancel, are zero, or are negligible.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

Be careful about using a variable twice to mean two different things. Might want to use x,y,z in place of a,b,c if you're using c for the speed of light.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.

Well, if it didn't precisely mean something, then there would have been no point in including it. If it is only meant to illustrate the point you say it illustrates, then you could just state that point, or you could explain how you can infer that from the equation (actually, I'm not convinced your description of its meaning is accurate). If it's meant to illustrate a point, you would need to provide more information. Anyway, looks interesting. So where did you get it?

Right I should have used x,y,z.

It may become more important tho as the discussion continues. I thought it simple enough for every reader to grasp. If we use it for two events we get a spacetime interval (s^2). If that is greater than 0 then the two events could not casually effect each other.

I suggesting a temporally fluctuation brought energy from the "future" into the "present" that caused space to expand. Because this expansion increases the separation form the origin of the fluctuation with the resulting addition of energy, the fluctuation could not be absorbed back into the singularity as normal quantum fluctuation do, because the energy would then have to travel faster than light to get back.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2015 11:45:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
It's an idea I had. I'm fleshing it out now.

Like some ideas I have it may have been thought up by some one else. I haven't found any papers written on it tho.

I'm thinking of illustrating the concept like Klein bottle with the neck of the bottle being a temporal fluctuation, due to the gravity of the singularity wrapped back in on itself. But the end of the neck would be a different temporal location actually pumping energy into the singularity for it's rapid expansion.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:04:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/4/2015 11:55:18 PM, Goya wrote:
Do you have any derivations?

I guess you asking how I came to this concept.

I often argue that a cause to the Big Bang has to be a cause outside this spacetime. God, branes, fluctuation in an encapsulating space, collapse of a 4d black hole, ect... all tend to accept a region outside of this spacetime.

One reason for this is the energy needed to move the energy, space of the early universe would come from the universe as a whole. This is like a fluctuation we see in bose einstein condensates or virtual particles emerging from vacuum energy. the bigger the particle or fluctuation the less it can travel or the less work it can do.

But what if the energy for this movement in the universal singularity came from the universal singularity a plank second in the future? Then there would be energy to effect a change in the whole of the singularity. Which such a loop can happen because the singularity is so dense. A closed time loop.

Does that answer your question?
Goya
Posts: 9
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:11:28 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 12:04:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:55:18 PM, Goya wrote:
Do you have any derivations?

I guess you asking how I came to this concept.

I often argue that a cause to the Big Bang has to be a cause outside this spacetime. God, branes, fluctuation in an encapsulating space, collapse of a 4d black hole, ect... all tend to accept a region outside of this spacetime.

One reason for this is the energy needed to move the energy, space of the early universe would come from the universe as a whole. This is like a fluctuation we see in bose einstein condensates or virtual particles emerging from vacuum energy. the bigger the particle or fluctuation the less it can travel or the less work it can do.

But what if the energy for this movement in the universal singularity came from the universal singularity a plank second in the future? Then there would be energy to effect a change in the whole of the singularity. Which such a loop can happen because the singularity is so dense. A closed time loop.

Does that answer your question?

Politely, no.

Physics equations are either derived or based on experiment. I'm assuming you haven't done the latter, so I'm inquiring into the pure mathematics of your equation. (i.e. I am asking for mathematical proof)
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:15:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 12:11:28 AM, Goya wrote:
At 5/5/2015 12:04:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:55:18 PM, Goya wrote:
Do you have any derivations?

I guess you asking how I came to this concept.

I often argue that a cause to the Big Bang has to be a cause outside this spacetime. God, branes, fluctuation in an encapsulating space, collapse of a 4d black hole, ect... all tend to accept a region outside of this spacetime.

One reason for this is the energy needed to move the energy, space of the early universe would come from the universe as a whole. This is like a fluctuation we see in bose einstein condensates or virtual particles emerging from vacuum energy. the bigger the particle or fluctuation the less it can travel or the less work it can do.

But what if the energy for this movement in the universal singularity came from the universal singularity a plank second in the future? Then there would be energy to effect a change in the whole of the singularity. Which such a loop can happen because the singularity is so dense. A closed time loop.

Does that answer your question?

Politely, no.

Physics equations are either derived or based on experiment. I'm assuming you haven't done the latter, so I'm inquiring into the pure mathematics of your equation. (i.e. I am asking for mathematical proof)

If I had this idea fleshed out to that point don't you think it would be in a paper.

Or are you asking for the equation I have presented so far?
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:16:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

wut.
Goya
Posts: 9
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:17:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 12:15:14 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
If I had this idea fleshed out to that point don't you think it would be in a paper.

I'm going to interpret this as you agreeing that you don't have a derivation for this equation.

Or are you asking for the equation I have presented so far?

If you're referring to the original equation, then no, because it's already stated in the OP.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:30:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 12:17:43 AM, Goya wrote:
At 5/5/2015 12:15:14 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
If I had this idea fleshed out to that point don't you think it would be in a paper.

I'm going to interpret this as you agreeing that you don't have a derivation for this equation.

Or are you asking for the equation I have presented so far?

If you're referring to the original equation, then no, because it's already stated in the OP.

Maybe this will help

http://arxiv.org...
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:37:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 12:16:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

wut.

Picture a ball of water that ripples on it's surface. Now picture those ripples being temporal and not spatial along it's surface. Energy could travel back to the originating time period and add energy to the whole of the ball.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:42:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 12:37:34 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/5/2015 12:16:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

wut.

Picture a ball of water that ripples on it's surface. Now picture those ripples being temporal and not spatial along it's surface. Energy could travel back to the originating time period and add energy to the whole of the ball.

So essentially the universe uses its future self to create the energy necessary to emerge in the first place?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 12:53:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 12:42:18 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 5/5/2015 12:37:34 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/5/2015 12:16:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

wut.

Picture a ball of water that ripples on it's surface. Now picture those ripples being temporal and not spatial along it's surface. Energy could travel back to the originating time period and add energy to the whole of the ball.

So essentially the universe uses its future self to create the energy necessary to emerge in the first place?

Well to rapidly expand, but yes! That's it.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 1:43:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
So time is a ball on a rubber band? It reaches a finite point then snaps back to the start. This gives it the energy to start again or theoretically travel in the opposite direction, creating the un-universe.
Am i grasping this right?
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 1:45:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
This begs the question, am i living my life backwards or forward at this point? From my perspective in the moment it could go both ways.
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 7:20:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/4/2015 11:35:59 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:26:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

It's a specific case of a quadratic function where a few of the terms cancel, are zero, or are negligible.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

Be careful about using a variable twice to mean two different things. Might want to use x,y,z in place of a,b,c if you're using c for the speed of light.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.

Well, if it didn't precisely mean something, then there would have been no point in including it. If it is only meant to illustrate the point you say it illustrates, then you could just state that point, or you could explain how you can infer that from the equation (actually, I'm not convinced your description of its meaning is accurate). If it's meant to illustrate a point, you would need to provide more information. Anyway, looks interesting. So where did you get it?

Right I should have used x,y,z.

It may become more important tho as the discussion continues. I thought it simple enough for every reader to grasp. If we use it for two events we get a spacetime interval (s^2). If that is greater than 0 then the two events could not casually effect each other.

I suggesting a temporally fluctuation brought energy from the "future" into the "present" that caused space to expand. Because this expansion increases the separation form the origin of the fluctuation with the resulting addition of energy, the fluctuation could not be absorbed back into the singularity as normal quantum fluctuation do, because the energy would then have to travel faster than light to get back.

So what is the derivation for this equation? What is its basis?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 8:11:20 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 7:20:10 AM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:35:59 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:26:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

It's a specific case of a quadratic function where a few of the terms cancel, are zero, or are negligible.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

Be careful about using a variable twice to mean two different things. Might want to use x,y,z in place of a,b,c if you're using c for the speed of light.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.

Well, if it didn't precisely mean something, then there would have been no point in including it. If it is only meant to illustrate the point you say it illustrates, then you could just state that point, or you could explain how you can infer that from the equation (actually, I'm not convinced your description of its meaning is accurate). If it's meant to illustrate a point, you would need to provide more information. Anyway, looks interesting. So where did you get it?

Right I should have used x,y,z.

It may become more important tho as the discussion continues. I thought it simple enough for every reader to grasp. If we use it for two events we get a spacetime interval (s^2). If that is greater than 0 then the two events could not casually effect each other.

I suggesting a temporally fluctuation brought energy from the "future" into the "present" that caused space to expand. Because this expansion increases the separation form the origin of the fluctuation with the resulting addition of energy, the fluctuation could not be absorbed back into the singularity as normal quantum fluctuation do, because the energy would then have to travel faster than light to get back.

So what is the derivation for this equation? What is its basis?

Forget it
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 4:38:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 8:11:20 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/5/2015 7:20:10 AM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:35:59 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:26:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

It's a specific case of a quadratic function where a few of the terms cancel, are zero, or are negligible.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

Be careful about using a variable twice to mean two different things. Might want to use x,y,z in place of a,b,c if you're using c for the speed of light.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.

Well, if it didn't precisely mean something, then there would have been no point in including it. If it is only meant to illustrate the point you say it illustrates, then you could just state that point, or you could explain how you can infer that from the equation (actually, I'm not convinced your description of its meaning is accurate). If it's meant to illustrate a point, you would need to provide more information. Anyway, looks interesting. So where did you get it?

Right I should have used x,y,z.

It may become more important tho as the discussion continues. I thought it simple enough for every reader to grasp. If we use it for two events we get a spacetime interval (s^2). If that is greater than 0 then the two events could not casually effect each other.

I suggesting a temporally fluctuation brought energy from the "future" into the "present" that caused space to expand. Because this expansion increases the separation form the origin of the fluctuation with the resulting addition of energy, the fluctuation could not be absorbed back into the singularity as normal quantum fluctuation do, because the energy would then have to travel faster than light to get back.

So what is the derivation for this equation? What is its basis?

Forget it

I wasn't attacking you. I'm genuinely interested. That's the first thing most hard scientists will ask.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 9:30:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 4:38:19 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/5/2015 8:11:20 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/5/2015 7:20:10 AM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:35:59 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:26:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

It's a specific case of a quadratic function where a few of the terms cancel, are zero, or are negligible.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

Be careful about using a variable twice to mean two different things. Might want to use x,y,z in place of a,b,c if you're using c for the speed of light.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.

Well, if it didn't precisely mean something, then there would have been no point in including it. If it is only meant to illustrate the point you say it illustrates, then you could just state that point, or you could explain how you can infer that from the equation (actually, I'm not convinced your description of its meaning is accurate). If it's meant to illustrate a point, you would need to provide more information. Anyway, looks interesting. So where did you get it?

Right I should have used x,y,z.

It may become more important tho as the discussion continues. I thought it simple enough for every reader to grasp. If we use it for two events we get a spacetime interval (s^2). If that is greater than 0 then the two events could not casually effect each other.

I suggesting a temporally fluctuation brought energy from the "future" into the "present" that caused space to expand. Because this expansion increases the separation form the origin of the fluctuation with the resulting addition of energy, the fluctuation could not be absorbed back into the singularity as normal quantum fluctuation do, because the energy would then have to travel faster than light to get back.

So what is the derivation for this equation? What is its basis?

Forget it

I wasn't attacking you. I'm genuinely interested. That's the first thing most hard scientists will ask.

With first coordinate being (x = 0, y = 0, z = 0, t = 0) the space time interval in this Minkowski space is:

s^2 = x' ^2 + y' ^2 + z' ^2 - (ct') ^2

It's the only equation I wrote.

I want to discuss my idea, not write paragraphs on the formulation of Minkowski space from Euclid space with special relativity. People can google that.

Besides I could never accurately describe it for the general public in enough detail to satisfy your contrariness UR. Why don't you post the paragraph instead of me so we all in the forum can be properly educated. I'm done with it.
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2015 10:26:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/5/2015 9:30:09 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/5/2015 4:38:19 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/5/2015 8:11:20 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/5/2015 7:20:10 AM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:35:59 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:26:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:17:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:12:48 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/4/2015 11:06:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Imagine the universe as a singularity before the Big Bang, and the beginning to space and time.

Time flows in an opposite direction than space. Simple equation:

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

If a quantum fluctuation in the singularity fluctuated in a temporal direction then space would begin to grow.

Given the density of the singularity, time and space would be bent upon itself. If energy traveled along the temporal fluctuation then more energy than the whole of the singularity would propel the singularity into expansion.

This would get around how observed quantum fluctuations dissipate back into the substance they emerge from, also that they only have energy taken from the whole.

Because the perturbations of the singularity would expand the temporal dimension would continue to stretch from t0 and the energy would have to travel faster than light (two comoving coordinates: singularity origin and temporal loop.) to be reabsorbed back to it's point of origin.

A universal singularity would self start itself into the universe we see now.

You forgot to define all of the terms in the equation. As far as I can tell, those symbols are arbitrary.

s^2 = a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - (ct)^2

It is like the pythagorean theorem but for 3 spatial dimensions and one temporal.

It's a specific case of a quadratic function where a few of the terms cancel, are zero, or are negligible.

s = space time interval.
a, b, c = spacial lengths.
c= speed of light with t to convert time into the same measurement as length.

Be careful about using a variable twice to mean two different things. Might want to use x,y,z in place of a,b,c if you're using c for the speed of light.

It's not terribly important to the scenario. just to denote that time can be thought of as a length being measured in opposite direction to space.

Well, if it didn't precisely mean something, then there would have been no point in including it. If it is only meant to illustrate the point you say it illustrates, then you could just state that point, or you could explain how you can infer that from the equation (actually, I'm not convinced your description of its meaning is accurate). If it's meant to illustrate a point, you would need to provide more information. Anyway, looks interesting. So where did you get it?

Right I should have used x,y,z.

It may become more important tho as the discussion continues. I thought it simple enough for every reader to grasp. If we use it for two events we get a spacetime interval (s^2). If that is greater than 0 then the two events could not casually effect each other.

I suggesting a temporally fluctuation brought energy from the "future" into the "present" that caused space to expand. Because this expansion increases the separation form the origin of the fluctuation with the resulting addition of energy, the fluctuation could not be absorbed back into the singularity as normal quantum fluctuation do, because the energy would then have to travel faster than light to get back.

So what is the derivation for this equation? What is its basis?

Forget it

I wasn't attacking you. I'm genuinely interested. That's the first thing most hard scientists will ask.

With first coordinate being (x = 0, y = 0, z = 0, t = 0) the space time interval in this Minkowski space is:

s^2 = x' ^2 + y' ^2 + z' ^2 - (ct') ^2

It's the only equation I wrote.

I want to discuss my idea, not write paragraphs on the formulation of Minkowski space from Euclid space with special relativity. People can google that.

Besides I could never accurately describe it for the general public in enough detail to satisfy your contrariness UR. Why don't you post the paragraph instead of me so we all in the forum can be properly educated. I'm done with it.

You're not being asked how to formulate the Minkowski space you're defining your function over. You're being asked how you arrived at (derived) this equation. The equation usually isn't the interesting part. Its derivation contains its meaning, interpretation, validity, applicability, scope, and usefulness.